nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to GOLFnSUN
Re: A supporting commentary to McDowells
regardless of which "side" one is on, the fact seems to remain that the simplest way to solve bandwidth problems (if there really are bandwidth problems) is TO ADD MORE BANDWIDTH.
but that's not sexy
and it cost money
and when you buy the DPI equipment, it lets you do all sorts of other stuff!
oh, by the way, McDowell is either ignorant of the facts or he chose to misrepresent what was actually found by Robb and the AP, because his description of what happened appears to be straight from Comcast press releases (I know, what a shock). |
|
jaminus
join:2004-10-14
Arlington, VA
| I, for one, would gladly download terabytes a month if my ISP allowed it. Do I need all that stuff? Not really. But if the bandwidth's there, I'll certainly use it. And so would many others as well.
Yes, capacity has got to increase, and that's why companies are investing in things like laying fiber, pair-bonding POTS lines, hybrid fiber-coax, DOCSIS 3.0, VDSL2, and the like.
Ultimately, though, there will ALWAYS be finite bandwidth and infinite demand for bandwidth. If you build it, they will come. That's why it's so important to manage a scarce resource in a manner that suits those who use the resource.
Is Sandvine the best way to manage a network? Probably not. But it's not entirely clear that "peak metering" is the best way, either -- after all, only 6% of Comcast's users were P2P users, and it's possible that far more users will be affected by the new metering system Comcast will soon implement.
Politicians should not be the ones who decide how ISPs deal with congestion. Competition among providers to give consumers the best possible service will benefit all of us in the long run. The fact that sometimes, some companies will make mistakes (i.e. Sandvine) is not a valid reason for abandoning the principles of freedom and private network ownership. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude  :and when you buy the DPI equipment, it lets you do all sorts of other stuff! I think it was Bob Briscoe who said at the IETF P2P Working Group that for every $1 dollar spent on DPI the ISP saved $10 in infrastructure increases.
I guess that's good, if the only thing you worry about is controlling your costs. It doesn't say anything for the fact that the other $9 is "access denied" to the applications, destinations, and content that the users want.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by funchords :It doesn't say anything for the fact that the other $9 is "access denied" to the applications, destinations, and content that the users want. Rewrite:
It doesn't say anything for the fact that the other $9 is "access denied" to the applications, destinations, and content that the users music & movie thieves want.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by GOLFnSUN :.. and content that the users music & movie thieves want. TK, you are so predictable.
copyright infringement isn't theft, so they can't be thieves. Sometimes I think you're a caricature of a real person. |
|
Jovi
join:2000-02-24
Mount Joy, PA
| reply to GOLFnSUN
Can we ever have a debate about bandwidth that does not involve being thieves? 
--
"Where's my coffee? Oh. I guess it's my turn to make it."  |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| reply to jaminus
said by jaminus :Politicians should not be the ones who decide how ISPs deal with congestion. Competition among providers to give consumers the best possible service will benefit all of us in the long run. Agreed, but politicians, unfortunately, are the only ones who ultimately make the decisions when it comes to the very competition that you refer to. |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude :regardless of which "side" one is on, the fact seems to remain that the simplest way to solve bandwidth problems (if there really are bandwidth problems) is TO ADD MORE BANDWIDTH. That's like saying the solution to your debt problem is to acquire more money. Although technically correct, it ignores the constraints of reality that would stop you from doing so.
Case in point: name all of the full DOCSIS 3.0 (ie, not pre-cert) cable modems that are currently being mass produced today. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to GOLFnSUN
The complaints about VPN or SSH being broken by DPI shoot a whole in your argument that DPI only affects "music & movie thieves".
--
---
Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to nasadude
Re: A supporting commentary to McDowells
said by nasadude :said by GOLFnSUN :.. and content that the users music & movie thieves want. Sometimes I think you're a caricature of a real person. A recent photo:
TK Junk Mail at home :)
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth :Case in point: name all of the full DOCSIS 3.0 (ie, not pre-cert) cable modems that are currently being mass produced today. Or 802.11N wi-fi gear (not DRAFT)
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
| said by funchords :said by espaeth :Case in point: name all of the full DOCSIS 3.0 (ie, not pre-cert) cable modems that are currently being mass produced today. Or 802.11N wi-fi gear (not DRAFT) That's not quite the same argument. The 11N standard is baked out enough that equipment will, in all probability, be firmware upgradeable to the final standard. The worst case scenario is that you end up just like the Cisco customers who bought power over Ethernet hardware before the 802.3af standard was ratified -- you can still use the hardware, but you won't be able to purchase any new devices to attach to it. Considering 11N draft APs are going for sub-$100 and NICs are dirt cheap, the hardship is also minimal.
Right now the DOCSIS 3.0 trial hardware is spendy because it's being produced in limited production runs, and modems like the DPC2505 that Comcast is using here in MN only have multiple downstream tuners combined with a single upstream tuner. Once upstream channel bonding is fully adopted and product actually starts rolling off assembly lines, the DPC2505 will simply be a $600 piece of dumpster fodder. Not exactly the kind of hardware you want to start rolling en-mass. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC | holy crap!
So what's the bet, that they're not really going to do upstream channel bonding RSN? |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq
1 edit | said by funchords :So what's the bet, that they're not really going to do upstream channel bonding RSN? They're certainly getting closer. If you look at the certification results here there were a bunch of CPE models that received D3.0 full certification in May & June. With any luck those should start turning into assembly line production runs soon.
The big issue right now is there is only one CMTS that has full D3 certification with upstream bonding support, and that's from Casa Systems. Unfortunately Cisco and Motorola seem to dominate the US cable modem head-end market... |
|
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533
| reply to Jovi
said by Jovi :Can we ever have a debate about bandwidth that does not involve being thieves? Not as long as TK is still allowed to post. |
|
fireflier
Coffee. . .Need Coffee
Premium
join:2001-05-25
Limbo
·Skype
| reply to Jovi
Re: A supporting commentary to McDowells
Probably not. Since thievery seems to be one of the talking points some need to use to justify corporate decisions that would otherwise be difficult to justify to paying customers.
It's easier to claim high-bandwidth users must be doing something wrong--and thus additional bandwidth is only going to support unethical or illegal activities--than actually debating the merits of legitimate use and what alternatives there are to the ISPs to handle those higher bandwidth (LEGITIMATE) applications.
--
Tradition: Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid. --despair.com |
|
A_nano_mouse
@transbay.net
| reply to jaminus
Re: A supporting commentary to McDowells
All we need is FIBER. Copper is obsolete and wireless is "stupid" until we can really reform the FCC and open the spectrum properly.
FIBER is the way to go. if 10 gbps adapters are commodified by the time you deploy, then you'll start offering your users 10 gigabit connections. Otherwise you'll have to do with a paltry ONE GIGABIT per second - aw darn.
WE (the citizens) build it - WE (the citizens hiring locally) run it - and that will be the future to live in.
See »communityfiber.org |
|
